Calculating place-based transit accessibility: Methods, tools and algorithmic dependence
Keywords:accessibility, land use, travel behaviour
To capture the complex relationships between transportation and land use, researchers and practitioners are increasingly using place-based measures of transportation accessibility to support a broad range of planning goals. This research reviews the state-of-the-art in applied transportation accessibility measurement and performs a comparative evaluation of software tools for calculating accessibility by walking and public transit including ArcGIS Pro, Emme, R5R, and OpenTripPlanner using R and Python, among others. Using a case study of Toronto, we specify both origin-based and regional-scale analysis scenarios and find significant differences in computation time and calculated accessibilities. While the calculated travel time matrices are highly correlated across tools, each tool produces different results for the same origin-destination pair. Comparisons of the estimated accessibilities also reveal evidence of spatial clustering in the ways paths are calculated by some tools relative to others at different locations around the city. With the growing emphasis on accessibility-based planning, analysts should approach the calculation of accessibility with care and recognize the potential for algorithmic dependence in their calculated accessibility results.
Allen, J. (2020). OpenTripPlanner analysis. Retrieved from https://github.com/SAUSy-Lab/OpenTripPlanner_analysis
Anselin, L. (1995). Local indicators of spatial association—LISA. Geographical Analysis, 27(2), 93–115.
ARC. (2019). Performance, the Atlanta region’s plan. Atlanta, GA: Atlanta Regional Commission.
Bast, H., Delling, D., Goldberg, A., Müller-Hannemann, M., Pajor, T., Sanders, P., . . . Werneck, R. F. (2016). Route planning in transportation networks. In L. Kliemann, & P. Sanders (Eds.), Algorithm engineering (pp. 19-80). Berlin: Springer.
Blanchard, S. D., & Waddell, P. (2017). Urban access: Generalized methodology for measuring regional accessibility with an integrated pedestrian and transit network. Transportation Research Record, 2653(1), 35–44.
Blumenberg, E., & Pierce, G. (2014). A driving factor in mobility? Transportation’s role in connecting subsidized housing and employment outcomes in the Moving to Opportunity (MTO) program. Journal of the American Planning Association, 80, 52–66.
Boeing, G. (2017). OSMnx: New methods for acquiring, constructing, analyzing, and visualizing complex street networks. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 65, 126–139.
Boisjoly, G., & El-Geneidy, A. M. (2017). How to get there? A critical assessment of accessibility objectives and indicators in metropolitan transportation plans. Transport Policy, 55, 38–50.
Conway, M. W., & Stewart, A. F. (2019). Getting Charlie off the MTA: A multiobjective optimization method to account for cost constraints in public transit accessibility metrics. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 33(9), 1759–1787.
Conway, M. W., Burd, A., & van der Linden, M. (2017). Evidence-based transit and land use sketch planning using interactive accessibility methods on combined schedule and headway-based networks. Transportation Research Record, 2653(1), 45–53.
Conway, M. W., Byrd, A., & Van Eggermond, M. (2018). Accounting for uncertainty and variation in accessibility metrics for public transport sketch planning. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 11(1), 541–558.
Cooley, D., & Barcelos, P. (2020, November). Package ‘googleway.’ Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/googleway/googleway.pdf
Crowley, D. F., Shalaby, A. S., & Zarei, H. (2009). Access walking distance, transit use, and transit-oriented development in North York City Center, Toronto, Canada. Transportation Research Record, 2110, 96–105.
Cui, M., & Levinson, D. (2020). Primal and dual access. Geographical Analysis, 52(3), 452–474.
El-Geneidy, A., Levinson, D., Diab, E., Boisjoly, G., Verbich, D., & Loong, C. (2016). The cost of equity: Assessing transit accessibility and social disparity using total travel cost. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 91(302–316).
Farber, S., & Allen, J. (2019). The Ontario Line: Socioeconomic distribution of travel time and accessibility benefits. Toronto: Metrolinx.
Farber, S., Ritter, B., & Fu, L. (2016). Space–time mismatch between transit service and observed travel patterns in the Wasatch Front, Utah: A social equity perspective. Travel Behavior and Society, 4, 40–48.
Ford, A. C., Barr, S. L., Dawson, R. J., & James, P. (2015). Transport accessibility analysis using GIS: Assessing sustainable transport in London. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 4(1), 124–149.
Fransen, K., Farber, S., Deruyter, G., & De Maeyer, P. (2018). A spatio-temporal accessibility measure for modelling activity participation in discretionary activities. Travel Behavior and Society, 10, 10–20.
Geurs, K. T., & van Wee, B. (2004). Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: Review and research directions. Journal of Transport Geography, 12(2), 127–140.
Giles-Corti, B., Broomhall, M. H., Knuiman, M., Collins, C., Douglas, K., Ng, K., . . . Donovan, R. J. (2005). Increasing walking: How important is distance to, attractiveness, and size of public open space? American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 28, 169–176.
Handy, S. (2008). Regional transportation planning in the US: An examination of changes in technical aspects of the planning process in response to changing goals. Transport Policy, 15, 113–116.
Higgins, C. D. (2019). Accessibility toolbox for R and ArcGIS. Transport Findings. https://doi.org/10.32866/8416
Higgins, C. D., DeJohn, A., Farber, S., Palm, M., Vaughan, J., Widener, M., . . . Miller, E. J. (2020). Transportation accessibility advice (Final report). Toronto: University of Toronto Transportation Research Institute.
Hu, Y., & Downs, J. (2019). Measuring and visualizing place-based space-time job accessibility. Journal of Transport Geography, 74, 278–288.
Huber, S., & Rust, C. (2016). Calculate travel time and distance with OpenStreetMap data using the Open Source Routing Machine (OSRM). The Stata Journal, 16(2), 416–423.
INRO. (2019). Introducing EMME scenes. Retrieved from https://info.inrosoftware.com/blog/introducing-emme-scenes
Iseki, H., & Taylor, B. D. (2009). Not all transfers are created equal: Toward a framework relating transfer connectivity to travel Behavior. Transport Reviews, 29, 777–800.
Kelly, C., Hulme, C., Farragher, T., & Clarke, G. (2016). Are differences in travel time or distance to healthcare for adults in global north countries associated with an impact on health outcomes? A systematic review. BMJ Open, 6(11), e013059.
Kwan, M. P. (1998). Space‐time and integral measures of individual accessibility: A comparative analysis using a point‐based framework. Geographical Analysis, 30(3), 191–216.
Lovelace, R. (2021). Open source tools for geographic analysis in transport planning. Journal of Geographical Systems, 23, 547–578.
Martens, K., & Golub, A. (2018). A fair distribution of accessibility: Interpreting civil rights regulations for regional transportation plans. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 41(4), 425–444.
Mayaud, J. R., Tran, M., Pereira, R. H., & Nuttall, R. (2019). Future access to essential services in a growing smart city: The case of Surrey, British Columbia. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 73, 1–15.
Merlin, L. A., & Hu, L. (2017). Does competition matter in measures of job accessibility? Explaining employment in Los Angeles. Journal of Transport Geography, 64, 77–88.
Metro. (2018). 2018 regional transportation plan. Portland, OR: Oregon Metro.
Miller, E. J. (2018). Accessibility: Measurement and application in transportation planning. Transport Reviews, 38, 551–555.
Miller, E. J., Vaughan, J., King, D., & Austin, M. (2015). Implementation of a “next generation” activity-based travel demand model: The Toronto case. Presentation at the Travel Demand Modelling and Traffic Simulation Session of the 2015 Conference of the Transportation Association of Canada, Charlottetown, PEI.
Morgan, M., Young, M., Lovelace, R., & Hama, L. (2019). OpenTripPlanner for R. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(44), 1–2.
North Central Texas Council of Governments. (2018). Mobility 2045: The Metropolitan Transportation Plan for North Central Texas. Arlington, TX.
Openshaw, S. (1984). The modifiable areal unit problem. Norwich: Geo Books.
OTP. (2020). Comparing OTP2 and OTP1. OpenTripPlanner. Retrieved from http://docs.opentripplanner.org/en/latest/Version-Comparison/#comparing-otp2-and-otp1
OTP. (2020). Routing bibliography. Retrieved from https://docs.opentripplanner.org/en/latest/Bibliography/
Owen, A., & Levinson, D. (2014). Access across America: Transit 2014 methodology (Final report No. 14-12). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Accessibility Observatory.
Páez, A., Higgins, C. D., & Vivona, S. F. (2019). Demand and level of service inflation in floating catchment area (FCA) methods. Plos one, 14(6), e0218773.
Páez, A., Scott, D. M., & Morency, C. (2012). Measuring accessibility: Positive and normative implementations of various accessibility indicators. Journal of Transport Geography, 25(C), 141–153.
Padgham, M., Stepniak, M., & Kapp, A. (2021, June). gtfsrouter. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/gtfsrouter/gtfsrouter.pdf
Pereira, R. H. (2019). Future accessibility impacts of transport policy scenarios: Equity and sensitivity to travel time thresholds for bus rapid transit expansion in Rio de Janeiro. Journal of Transport Geography, 74, 321–332.
Pereira, R. H., Grégoire, L., Wessel, N., & Martins, J. (2019). Tutorial with reproducible example to estimate a travel time matrix using OpenTripPlanner and Python. Retrieved from https://github.com/rafapereirabr/otp-travel-time-matrix. doi:10.5281/zenodo.3242134
Pereira, R. H., Saraiva, M., Herszenhut, D., Braga, C. K., & Conway, M. W. (2021). r5r: Rapid realistic routing on multimodal transport networks with R5 in R. Findings. https://doi.org/10.32866/001c.21262.
Proffitt, D. G., Bartholomew, K., Ewing, R., & Miller, H. J. (2019). Accessibility planning in American metropolitan areas: Are we there yet? Urban Studies, 56, 167–192.
Saxon, J., Koschinsky, J., Acosta, K., Anguiano, V., Anselin, L., & Rey, S. (2021). An open software environment to make spatial access metrics more accessible. Journal of Computational Social Science, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42001-021-00126-8
SCAG. (2016). Environmental justice appendix, 2016-2040 regional transportation plan. Los Angeles, CA: Southern California Association of Governments.
Shen, Q. (1998). Location characteristics of inner-city neighborhoods and employment accessibility of low-wage worker. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 25, 345–365.
Siddiq, F., & Taylor, B. D. (2021). Tools of the trade? Assessing the progress of accessibility measures for planning practice. Journal of the American Planning Association. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2021.1899036
Stewart, A. (2020, July). Comparison of R5 and OTP. Github: Conveyal R5. Retrieved from https://github.com/conveyal/r5/issues/575#issuecomment-655237929
TfL. (2006). Transport 2025. London, UK: Transport for London.
Tilhaun, N., & Li, M. (2015). Walking access to transit stations: Evaluating barriers with stated preference. Transportation Research Record, 1534, 16–23.
TTC. (2017). Service standards and decision rules for planning transit service. Toronto: Toronto Transit Commission.
Unterfinger, M., & Possenriede, D. (2021, April). Package 'hereR'. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/hereR/hereR.pdf
Wardman, M. (2004). Public transport values of time. Transport Policy, 11, 363–377.
Wessel, N., & Farber, S. (2019). On the accuracy of schedule-based GTFS for measuring accessibility. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 12(1), 475–500.
Xi, Y. L., Miller, E. J., & Saxe, S. (2018). Exploring the impact of different cut-off times on isochrone measurements of accessibility. Transportation Research Record, 2672, 113–124.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2022 Christopher Higgins, Matthew Palm, Amber DeJohn, Luna Xi, James Vaughan, Steven Farber, Michael Widener, Eric Miller
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with JTLU agree to the following terms: 1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License 4.0 that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. 2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal. 3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.